Friday, February 21, 2014

A Thought on the Parsha

Feel free to download and print the Parasha
sheet and share it with your friends and family: Click here: Parashat VaYakhel

Before entering into
extensive detail about the making of the Mishkan, this week's

parashaopens
with the mitzvah of
Shabbat:

And Moshe gathered all the congregation of the children of
Israel together, and said unto them, these are the words which
the Lord has commanded, that you should do them. Six days shall work
be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you a holy day, a Shabbat of
rest to the Lord... (Shemot 34:1-2)

The juxtaposition of the Mishkan and Shabbat
occurs not only here but inKi Tisaas well at the end of
the commands to make the Mishkan. This juxtaposition indicates, minimally, that
these are two parallel institutions, two loci ofkedushah. The Mishkan
representskedushat makom, sanctity of space, while Shabbat representskedushat zman, sanctity of time. The Rabbis take this
further stating that the juxtaposition is meant to indicate that Shabbat cannot
be violated for the making of the Mishkan. That is, sanctity of time trumps
sanctity of space.

It is easy to understand why this is the case.
Sanctity of time, Shabbat, precedes historically any sanctified space, the Land
of Israel, the Temple Mount, or the Mishkan. It also directs one away from the
physical. Time is not a physical entity, space is. Physicality and sanctity can
sometimes be a dangerous mix; it could lead to idolatry. Shabbat's lack of
physicality make it truer to the infinite, non-physical God, the source of all
that is holy in the world.

Here inParashat
Vayakhelthe command of Shabbat precedes the Mishkan,
while in

Ki Tisait followed the
Mishkan. What is the reason for this change in order? Something happened
between the commandment of Shabbat inKi Tisaand the commandment of
Shabbat inVayakhel- the making of the
Golden Calf.

Originally, God started with the command of
the Mishkan. Shabbat comes as a warning at the end: "However, My Shabbats
you shall keep" (31:13). It is true that Shabbat is more important,
but the focus is on the Mishkan. "However",akh, make sure to remember Shabbat; even as you build the
Mishkan, do not violate Shabbat.

After the Golden Calf, the order of
presentation had to be different. It became clear that the people could
easily turn the physical into an idol. A reorientation was necessary. Only the
prioritizing of Shabbat, not just in principle, but also in the mindset of the
people, could ensure that the Mishkan would not itself become a Golden Calf.
Start with Shabbat; start with the ultimate, abstract truth. Make sure that
this foundation is well laid, that you have fully internalized that thiskedushais primary. Only then
can you move on to building the Mishkan.

But notice what did
not happen. The Torah did not, in response to the Golden Calf, retract the
command of the Mishkan. Why not just eliminate the physicalkedushahand be done with it?
The answer is obvious: as people we are trapped in our physicality. It is
not possible to sustain a life ofkedushahif all we have is the
abstractkedushahof Shabbat. We need
physicalkedushah; we need ritual mitzvot, we need a synagogue,
we need a Temple. It is these that make our worship real; that give us the
ability to connect to an infinite God.

Rambam tried to move beyond this. He claimed
that sacrifices were only needed for a people who were influenced by pagan
practice; that the ideal was to sit and contemplate God. But who can worship
that way? We may not require sacrifices, but who can really feel connected to
God through prayer without any physical component? We need a synagogue
and the rituals of prayer. We need to create images in our minds which make God
more like us; a Being we can relate to. We still need a Mishkan and we can have
it, so long as we do not confuse it with God Godself. So long as thekedushahof Shabbat, of
abstract, higher truth comes first.

Shabbat represents more than non-physicality;
it represents inclusivity and unrestricted access. The Mishkan, in its very
this-worldliness, was not equally accessible to all. It existed in one place,
more accessible to those who lived closer, less so to those who lived farther.
And not everyone had the same access. There was a hierarchy - Kohen, Levi,
Yisrael - of who could enter, who could get closer to the Holy of Holies, to
God's glory as it manifested itself in the physical world. Even Kohanim could
be excluded from access or from service if they were impure, if they were not
properly clothed, or if they had physical blemishes.

Shabbat, in contrast, is accessible to all,
regardless of place, of status, or of gender. This is underscored in the
opening verse of theparasha: "And Moshe gatheredall the
congregationof the Children of Israel..."
Mishkan is about hierarchy; Mishkan is for the few. Shabbat is about
equality; Shabbat is for all.

kedushotexist in an ongoing
dialectic where thekedushahsignified by Shabbat
must remain primary, but where it cannot exist without its physical translation
into the

kedushahsignified
by the Mishkan.

It is this dialectic that I believe is in play
in so much of the contemporary debates that have been raging within our
community. The call for greater inclusivity in areas of ritual and
synagogue echoes the opening words of ourparasha. It is a call
for thekedushahof Shabbat, thekedushahthat precedes the
Mishkan. It is a call for akedushahthat is forallthe congregation of
Israel; akedushahof equality and
inclusivity.

However, those who
oppose changes in traditional ritual and roles are not motivated by
mean-spiritedness or a desire to exclude people. Their opposition is rooted in
the second part of theparasha,in the importance of
Mishkan. These existing structures and hierarchies serve as symbols to impart
necessary religious values. While some people may be excluded as a
result, it is these symbols that root us in our past, in our ancient
traditions, in authenticity. From this point of view, to tear down these
structures is to tear down the Mishkan. It is to tear down those symbols that
anchor us - people who live in the real world and not the ideal one - in the
past and connect us to the full weight and power of our tradition.

Is our current
structure a Mishkan or is it possible that it has become more like a Golden
Calf? Has it become so reified and concretized that it has become an end in
itself, worshipped for its own sake, undermining higherkedushah?

Perhaps one way to know if this is the case is
to see whether anything else is ever given any weight. If someone can only talk
about maintaining traditional structures and guarding its borders without ever
addressing the larger religious questions and concerns, then it is possible
that these structures, for this person, no longer point to a higher truth. They
may have become this person's Golden Calf.

Those calling for more equality need to
respect the need for the Mishkan. They do themselves a disservice if they think
that one can exist in a world of Shabbat without the symbolic, rooted truths of
the Mishkan. And those calling for maintaining the traditional forms must
be vigilant that these forms do not supplant the greater religious truths. They
must make sure that they are not turning the Mishkan into their Golden
Calf.

Humility is the key.
If each side can approach its own position with humility, if each side can
appreciate the truths held by the other, we will be able to work towards a religious
life that has fullkedushah,a life rooted in the
eternal truths of Shabbat and in the concrete truths of the Mishkan.